If it were left in to the opinion of Victoria Bernhardt (2007) to judge my school’s culture of data, I would assume that she would swiftly identify areas that could be stronger(Bernhardt, 2007). Though I would agree with Bernhardt, I would attest that out school’s overall data culture has strengthened over the recent years (Bernhardt, 2007).
In the areas of curriculum and instruction we have implemented data collection tools, largely in the areas of reading and writing. In the primary grades programs such as Fox in the Box and DRA’s are used to assess student progress in fluency and Language Arts skills. The information collected from these 1:1 assessments are used to identify student strengths as well as weaknesses that can be strengthened with curriculum reinforcement and basic skills. In the upper grades the reading program provides a placement assessment (in the beginning of the year) and weekly assessments that assess student strengths in the skills covered that week. Personally, I spiral these tests, instead of following them in order to assess student retention of the material. Data used from the primary and secondary reading programs can be presented to parents at conferences, meetings and used for reflection by the teacher.
This year our Enrichment teacher started using the TOFL testing as a tool for placement into program. Many teachers were happy to see this take place, as many students were in the enrichment program based parental politics.
The most identifiable weakness in our school’s data culture is inconsistency and communication. The expectation for collecting data with assessments is part of the assumption of professionalism, but never assessed by the leadership. A source of communication of data is not in place. In a small school it’s easy to rely on hallway meetings rather than written communication that can be traced and organized. For example, weekly assessments and TOFL scores, are not shared in a common place other than a student’s file. With a system for sharing information in place student information could be used and shared on a more reliable basis than memory.
Bernhardt (2007) reinforces the importance of a successful data culture with her example of the school in Little River (Bernhardt, 2007, p118) To the fairness of our leadership this year, it has been a state of flux. Our principal is new, following a principal that was with the school for over thirty years and our superintendent is moving on to another district. Though each communicate to the staff with collected data, they have not made it clear that their modeling is practice is to be followed. In postings I have spoken to priorities in funding, but there are always creative and free ways to establish a culture. The hard part of “free” is the increased commitment to maintaining communication and organization standards (ie. google docs, tables, shared file folders). Bernhardt (2007) would identify that the absence of this communication is a result of a the staff and leadership not conveying a vision for how data is to be shared, collected and then used inside of the culture (Bernhardt, 2007).
Bernhardt, V. L. (2007). Translating data into information to improve teaching and learning (pp. 103-150). Larchmont, NY: Eye On Education.
